Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
- Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.8k
Implement subnet config validation (fixes #4552)#5364
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Changes from all commits
5691b8268c636d6c8184dbadd4d7File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Jump to
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -2846,6 +2846,94 @@ def check_config(self, cfg): | ||
| ) | ||
| class SubnetTest(unittest.TestCase): | ||
| INVALID_SUBNET_TYPES = [ | ||
| None, | ||
| False, | ||
| 10, | ||
| ] | ||
| INVALID_SUBNET_MAPPINGS = [ | ||
| "", | ||
| "192.168.0.1/sdfsdfs", | ||
| "192.168.0.1/", | ||
| "192.168.0.1/33", | ||
| "192.168.0.1/01", | ||
| "192.168.0.1", | ||
| "fe80:0000:0000:0000:0204:61ff:fe9d:f156/sdfsdfs", | ||
| "fe80:0000:0000:0000:0204:61ff:fe9d:f156/", | ||
| "fe80:0000:0000:0000:0204:61ff:fe9d:f156/129", | ||
| "fe80:0000:0000:0000:0204:61ff:fe9d:f156/01", | ||
| "fe80:0000:0000:0000:0204:61ff:fe9d:f156", | ||
| "ge80:0000:0000:0000:0204:61ff:fe9d:f156/128", | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Add a test for more than 1 slash as well! Author There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Will do, good idea! | ||
| "192.168.0.1/31/31", | ||
| ] | ||
| VALID_SUBNET_MAPPINGS = [ | ||
| "192.168.0.1/0", | ||
| "192.168.0.1/32", | ||
| "fe80:0000:0000:0000:0204:61ff:fe9d:f156/0", | ||
| "fe80:0000:0000:0000:0204:61ff:fe9d:f156/128", | ||
| "1:2:3:4:5:6:7:8/0", | ||
| "1::/0", | ||
| "1:2:3:4:5:6:7::/0", | ||
| "1::8/0", | ||
| "1:2:3:4:5:6::8/0", | ||
| "::/0", | ||
| "::8/0", | ||
| "::2:3:4:5:6:7:8/0", | ||
| "fe80::7:8%eth0/0", | ||
| "fe80::7:8%1/0", | ||
| "::255.255.255.255/0", | ||
| "::ffff:255.255.255.255/0", | ||
| "::ffff:0:255.255.255.255/0", | ||
| "2001:db8:3:4::192.0.2.33/0", | ||
| "64:ff9b::192.0.2.33/0", | ||
| ] | ||
| def test_config_invalid_subnet_type_validation(self): | ||
| for invalid_subnet in self.INVALID_SUBNET_TYPES: | ||
| with pytest.raises(ConfigurationError) as exc: | ||
| self.check_config(invalid_subnet) | ||
| assert "contains an invalid type" in exc.value.msg | ||
| def test_config_invalid_subnet_format_validation(self): | ||
| for invalid_subnet in self.INVALID_SUBNET_MAPPINGS: | ||
| with pytest.raises(ConfigurationError) as exc: | ||
| self.check_config(invalid_subnet) | ||
| assert "should use the CIDR format" in exc.value.msg | ||
| def test_config_valid_subnet_format_validation(self): | ||
| for valid_subnet in self.VALID_SUBNET_MAPPINGS: | ||
| self.check_config(valid_subnet) | ||
| def check_config(self, subnet): | ||
| config.load( | ||
| build_config_details({ | ||
| 'version': '3.5', | ||
| 'services': { | ||
| 'web': { | ||
| 'image': 'busybox' | ||
| } | ||
| }, | ||
| 'networks': { | ||
| 'default': { | ||
| 'ipam': { | ||
| 'config': [ | ||
| { | ||
| 'subnet': subnet | ||
| } | ||
| ], | ||
| 'driver': 'default' | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| }) | ||
| ) | ||
| class InterpolationTest(unittest.TestCase): | ||
| @mock.patch.dict(os.environ) | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's unlikely this will ever be fed something that isn't a string, but if it does, this will break when you try to
split()a few lines later.I'd remove the type check altogether.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actually, it seems that this check is common for the format checker methods in order for it to go to the type checker. Otherwise, in the old code, it will fail at the '/' check or in the new code where I just use regex, at the re.match code.
So would you prefer me to:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The other 2
format_*methods can take integers as well, which is why they check the type. Since we enforcetype: stringon subnet entries, it will exit before ever hitting this method if the type is invalid:Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hey Joffrey!
If you are using the new format code with those commands then maybe our environments are different, otherwise, it appears that at least on my end it is running the format checker before running the type checker. When I remove the isinstance check and run those two same commands with the same docker compose file:
And when I modify the 3.5 config json schema file, to where subnet requires a number type, the type checker still doesn't complain when I give it a boolean. And when I run the type:number/format:subnet with a valid subnet, it fails at the type checker, but goes through the format checker (I tested by a simple print statement). Could our Json schema libraries be out of sync then?
So then, in this case, could it be:
If I go inside the jsonschema._format.py code, here is a few examples of what I've seen, which they all seem to have that isinstance check even for string only types such as emails
Thank you again for all the assistance/feedback Joffrey, I really appreciate it!!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Interesting, I'll check out your branch and take a closer look. I'll let you know.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yup, you were right, my bad. I expected the type constraint to be enforced before format validation.